Welcome to the Forum Archive!

Years of conversation fill a ton of digital pages, and we've kept all of it accessible to browse or copy over. Whether you're looking for reveal articles for older champions, or the first time that Rammus rolled into an "OK" thread, or anything in between, you can find it here. When you're finished, check out the boards to join in the latest League of Legends discussions.

ChronicleX: Metagame versus Metagaming

Continued over from Sauron's guide thread, so as not to derail it completely.

Quote:

ChronicleX:

Quote:

DiscworldDeath:

Metagaming is exactly that, it's playing the meta-game. It's making decisions based on what the metagame is.

No it isn't. Metagame isn't a decision, its a guideline. There is no decisions behind it. That is the part you cannot seem to comprehend, read the wiki for more info. The only decision is do you follow it or not.

You need to read better Chronicle :P Or rather, read it all and not reply just to one sentence, especially the first.

I agreed with you on what METAGAME is.
Then I defined for you metagaming.

Now, yes, people who metagame both accept and subvert the metagame.
It's not the same as people who try to bring forth a new metagame which they think is stronger overall. If people play X, and you have a counter to X, then that counter is actually a discussion from within the realm of the same metagame - it's not analytical versus continental, for an analogy, it's not poetry as opposed to mathematics. It's giving a counter-argument within the same field.

If you know the opposition is likely to do X, and you do something to counter that, you're not breaking the meta-game, you only do it because of the current metagame, and it's a counter. You are gaming the meta, you are meta-gaming.

Meta-gaming already assumes you're aware of the current meta and are engaged in a strategic dialogue with it.
Strategic, as in, before the game, as opposed to tactical decisions made within the game, though these can also occur (will the enemy Malzahar build squishy or tanky? etc).

And once again it goes back to what I have said every post for the past 6-8 posts. The metagame is the unwritten rules. The rules can change, but rules still remain. It's not a metagaming unless it actually works, when it works it becomes the standard. The standard is the metagame. The stupid things that do not work, the strats that do not work, that is not the metagaming, because it doesn't work.

Except this contradicts what you said about solo top AS Volibear. Whatever everyone uses, even if it's dumb and ineffective, is the meta-game. Even if you have the best counter, so long no one else adapts, this remains the metagame.

Except this contradicts what you said about solo top AS Volibear. Whatever everyone uses, even if it's dumb and ineffective, is the meta-game. Even if you have the best counter, so long no one else adapts, this remains the metagame.

None of it is contradicts, you just cannot comprehend that metagaming is not strategy. If I decide next game I want to go AD ahri that isn't metagaming, that is me deciding to go AD ahri. The metagame is Ahri is a mage, thats the basic guideline to follow, that is the meta, she is a caster. Anything outside of that is breaking the meta, because it is not the norm.

How many times must I explain this to you? Is 10+ posts and an entire wikipedia page not enough for you? I'll quote the wiki one last time. Same quote as before.

Quote:

Wikipedia:

In simple terms, it is the use of out-of-game information or resources to affect one's in-game decisions.

It is not the decisions, the decisions you make is stratergy. The current metagame is the decisions you are expected to make. Metagaming is just following the meta. Randomly doing something without an overall purpose is not metagaming, thats just gaming. Is there any part of that you do not understand? I cannot phrase it any simpler.

Meta-gaming is making decisions while taking the current metagame into account. If you play AD Ahri, you're not metagaming. If you play AD Ahri because it counters what you expect to face as a result of the state of the current meta, then you're metagaming.

And metagaming is usually a strategic decision.

As for the wiki article, everything in it supports my posts :-/ I was in my country's top 20 MtG players while I played, and I've played and was an accepted source of knowledge in the warmachine/Hordes wargame, particularly for the faction of my choice. I know what metagame is, but please, try to read.

Metagame is not the same as metagaming. Read this line again, then re-read everything I posted on the issue.
Metagame is an ephemeral object, metagaming is an action.

Quote:

Metagaming is just following the meta. Randomly doing something without an overall purpose is not metagaming, thats just gaming.

Metagaming is any act you do while taking the current metagame into account, whether it's to counter it, or to follow it. But it needs to be done consciously.

Also, a note, these are definitions, so there's a certain amount of arbitrariness in them, and thus it's in part a semantic argument; but you do need to make an effort to read what people are writing rather than what you are sure they are saying. You also are arguing against the terminology most people here appear to be using - and in the realm of language, there's fault with that.

And the action is the expected one, the one set out as depicted. You did not decide it. If you decide for yourself then you are not following the meta. If you do something that the meta does not depict with intent then you are breaking the meta.

Try reading. Do I have to go through the entire article and explain every section to you? Do you really still not understand what a metagame or metagaming is? The metagame or metagaming is nothing todo with decision making. Keyword, making. The decision is already made, thats the action. The Action is the pre-determined set of decisions you are expected to make such as going mid if your a mage in rift, having your team go ranged ad carry with support bot. You didn't decide any of that, the metagame did.

Quote:

DiscworldDeath:

Metagaming is any act you do while taking the current metagame into account, whether it's to counter it, or to follow it. But it needs to be done consciously.

Almost. It is any act you take while taking the metagame into account with an intent, a purpose. Doing something for "fun" or without intent is not metagaming. The most common intent people have when metagaming is to change the current meta or to improve upon it for example.

Social order, and social structures try to pass off that what they do, what they perpetuate is normal, is just how things are. And you're not actually making any decision.

But this is not true. Suppose one of society's rules is you don't spit on people. It's not that the rule exists, and we all follow the existing rule. The rule is recreated each and every time we do not spit on people. Now, a negative example is a bit problematic, so let's look at saying hello to one's neighbours. Every time you say hello to your neighbours you're not just following and affirming the existing rule, you are in fact creating it.

Likewise with the meta, every time you follow the existing meta you are also creating it, recreating it, cementing it as the current meta.
The decision wants to appear as "already made", but you make it yourself each time you "follow" it.

Also, again with pulling one sentence. The point about intent exists in my post. I called it "consciously".

Also, again with pulling one sentence. The point about intent exists in my post. I called it "consciously".

Then why the hell did you attempt to argue against the things I have said to the point where you made a new topic on it when you have been agreeing with me this entire time? That's not how arguments work, you are not following the argument meta.